Skip to content

The Ohana Covenant

!!! abstract "Status: Request for Comments (RFC)" This document outlines the baseline behavioral standards for The Ohana Network. It is designed to be a living agreement, refined through the consensus of our core administrative council.

The Ohana Network is built on the Hawaiian concept of Ohana—the understanding that we are bound together in a shared human family. Like as with in-person relationships, we believe the internet community functions best when it reflects this shared humanity.

By joining this network, an administrator is not endorsing the beliefs of every other island in the archipelago. You are endorsing the behavioral standards that allow us to sit at the same table. We do not gatekeep ideas; we gatekeep how those ideas are communicated.

As an administrator applying for network federation, you agree to uphold, actively enforce, and locally publish the following framework.

I. The Core Ethos: Behavior Over Belief

The Ohana Network protects ideological diversity by enforcing strict civility in the shared public square.

We welcome communities across the spectrum—from faith-based instances and secular humanist groups to hyper-local civic networks. To make this ecosystem work, we draw a hard line between ideas (which can be debated) and actions (which can cause harm).

  • We protect the clash of ideas: Users are free to express theological convictions, scientific assertions (including biological and psychological frameworks), political leanings, and traditional or progressive viewpoints.
  • We prohibit attacks on people: Hatred, slurs, doxxing, pornography, illegal activity, and the promotion of violence are strictly forbidden. You do not have to validate a neighbor's worldview, but you must treat your neighbor with basic human respect.
  • Context matters: Boundary-pushing content—such as edgy comedy, intense high-friction debate, or specialized mature discussions—must remain in opt-in, private groups (like Bonfire Circles) or be shielded behind strict Content Warnings (as outlined in our Moderation Bridge Policy). It must not be forced onto the public federation timeline.

II. Objective Definitions

To prevent the weaponization of moderation tools against dissenting viewpoints, all participating administrators agree to operate using these standardized definitions:

  1. Harassment vs. Disagreement
    • Harassment is a targeted behavioral action. It includes sustained, uninvited aggression, intimidation, mockery directed at an individual, dogpiling, or following a user across threads after they have disengaged.
    • Disagreement is a clash of ideas. Challenging a viewpoint or vigorously debating a policy is not harassment, regardless of how strongly the other party feels.
  2. Bigotry vs. Worldview
    • Bigotry involves dehumanization. It is the use of slurs, the promotion of violence, or the assertion that a specific demographic is inherently subhuman or unworthy of basic rights based on immutable traits.
    • Worldview involves foundational beliefs about how the world works. Making scientific assertions, affirming bi-gendered viewpoints, or expressing specific theological tenets is the expression of a worldview, not an act of bigotry.
  3. Coercion vs. Advocacy
    • Coercive/Cult Behavior relies on forced ideological purity, attempting to forcibly silence dissenters, or attempting to harm someone's real-life livelihood (cancel culture) over a stated belief.
    • Passionate Advocacy is vigorously defending a position through argument and persuasion in the public square.
  4. Civility (The Golden Rule)
    • Attack the premise, not the person. Name-calling, vulgarity, and bad-faith mockery are breaches of civility.

III. Moderation Minimum Standards

Full network federation is a privilege reserved for communities that do the work of moderating themselves. Administrators maintain the right to institute stricter rules for their local island, but must at minimum enforce the Ohana Covenant for federated interactions.

When a user violates the Covenant, administrators must enforce a consistent escalation policy:

  • Strike One (The Warning): For a first or minor offense, the administrator applies a Content Warning (CW) to obscure the post, or deletes it entirely if it crosses a hard line (e.g., explicit imagery). A formal warning is issued to the user citing the specific Ohana definition violated.
  • Strike Two (The Limit): If a second violation occurs within a rolling 90-day window, the user is "Silenced" or "Limited." Their account remains active, but their content is removed from public network timelines and discovery features.
  • Strike Three (The Ban): A third violation within the same 90-day window—or a documented pattern of bad-faith warnings across three consecutive quarters—results in full account suspension from the server.

Failure by an administrator to address reported cross-island violations in good faith will result in the island being moved back to Provisional status, or severed from the Ohana allowlist entirely.

IV. Administrator Commitment

By submitting an allowlist request to the Ohana Commons, you verify that: 1. Your server operates with closed, invite-only, or manually reviewed account registrations. 2. You have read, understood, and posted a link to this Covenant for your local users to reference. 3. You commit to communicating with the Ohana administration council via our hub in good faith when moderation conflicts arise between islands.

🌱 Technology in service of individuals, families, and communities.